01.04.2025 LOVEPREET S EET SINGH … v. STATE OF PUN F PUNJAB
Case Details
IN THE H HE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB A AB AND HARYANA RH AT CHANDIGARH 156 CRM-M Date of de M No.17703 of 2025 e of decision: 01.04.2025 LOVEPREET S EET SINGH …. Petitioner Versus STATE OF PUN F PUNJAB …. Respondent CORAM: HON HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE MANI MANISHA BATRA Present : Mr
Legal Reasoning
Mr. B.S. Bhalla, Advocate for the r the petitioner. (cid:1)(cid:2)(cid:3)(cid:4)(cid:5)(cid:6)(cid:7)(cid:8)(cid:9)(cid:10)(cid:11)(cid:4)(cid:12)(cid:11)(cid:13)(cid:8)(cid:14)(cid:15)(cid:16)(cid:11)(cid:17)(cid:18)(cid:4)(cid:4)(cid:12)(cid:15)(cid:3)(cid:4)(cid:19)(cid:3)(cid:20)(cid:3)(cid:21) (cid:1)(cid:2) (cid:3)(cid:21)(cid:3)(cid:18)(cid:4)(cid:22)(cid:6)(cid:23)(cid:24)(cid:11)(cid:13). **** MANISHA BAT A BATRA, J. (oral) 1. Prayer in this petition has been mad Pray tting en made by the petitioner for setting aside the order d order dated 01.02.2023 passed by Re ising by Revisional Court in case arising out of FIR No.18 No.184 dated 20.10.2021 registered u njab tered under Section 61 of the Punjab Excise Act, 191 t, 1914, registered at Police Station oga, Station City Moga, District Moga, whereby, while while deciding the petition, learned R ified rned Revisional Court had modified the order dated 0 ated 04.04.2022 passed by learned tri ered ned trial Magistrate and had ordered to release of the of the vehicle of the petitioner on bank er on furnishing cash security/bank guarantee. 2. Brief facts relevant for the purpose Brie n are rpose of disposal of this petition are that the aforemen orementioned FIR has been registered d the istered against the petitioner and the co-accused on th on the allegations that on 20.10.202 ered 10.2021, illicit liquor was recovered from a scorpio c orpio car bearing registration No.HR er o.HR-56-A-2424 and the petitioner along with co-ac accused had brought the said liqu . The id liquor from some other State. The petitioner filed filed an application for release of e on ase of aforementioned vehicle on superdari. He is He is undisputedly, registered owne
Decision
order owner of this vehicle. Vide order Jyoti 2025.04.03 17:09 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM- -M No.17703 of 2025 -2- dated 04.04.2022 4.2022, the learned Chief Judicial Ma f his ial Magistrate, Moga disposed of his application by di by directing the petitioner to furnish pe of rnish bank guarantee in the shape of FDR or cash am sh amount to the tune of (cid:1)8 lakhs and iance hs and further subject to compliance of some more c ore conditions. The petitioner filed t the filed a revision petition against the said order thereb thereby, making prayer for modifying g the ifying the same and for reducing the amount of the b the bank guarantee/cash security an r for rity and further making prayer for directing release elease of the vehicle subject to furnish urety furnishing superdarinama and surety bonds. The learn e learned Revisional Court observed th f the rved that as per Section 78(2) of the Punjab Excise A cise Act, a conveyance could be orde g the e ordered to be released during the pendency of tria of trial only on submission of securit ty or security (in form of cash security or bank guarantee antee) equivalent to the value of d by e of conveyance, thereof and by declining the pra the prayer so made for furnishing sup ds, it g superdarinama or surety bonds, it partly allowed th wed the revision petition by reducing t cing the security amount to (cid:1)5 lakhs lakhs from (cid:1)8 lakhs. khs. 3. 4. Still aggrieved, this petition has been Still as been filed by the petitioner. It is argued by learned counsel for th It is le in l for the petitioner that the vehicle in question is 13 ye s 13 years’ old vehicle and its value h to a value has been already reduced to a great extent. The t. The petitioner is a poor person. He urity on. He is not able to furnish security in the form of ca of cash or bank guarantee. It is there ad of s therefore, submitted that instead of furnishing cash s cash security or bank guarantee, he b rdari e, he be allowed to furnish superdari bonds and surety surety bonds to the extent of (cid:1)5lakhs nal 5lakhs as ordered by the Revisional Court. 5. The submissions as made by the p The been the petitioner’s counsel have been ngth. heard at length. Jyoti 2025.04.03 17:09 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM- -M No.17703 of 2025 -3- 6. On going through the record, I am On t I am of the considered opinion that the impugned o ned order dated 01.02.2023 does no n es not warrant any interference in view of the fact t e fact that the provisions of Section 78 is ion 78(2) of the Punjab Excise Act is mandatory in na in nature and as per the same, the o be e, the vehicle can be ordered to be released during t uring the pendency of the trial, only on n the only on submission of security in the form of cash sec sh security and bank guarantee equiv icle. equivalent to the value of vehicle. The petitioner ha ner has not placed any material on re ue of l on record to show that the value of the vehicle in qu in question is less than (cid:1)5 lakhs. Mo been s. Moreso, the only prayer has been made for furnis furnishing of superdarinama/persona ty or ersonal bonds as well as surety or indemnity bonds bonds. This prayer can certainly no f the nly not be accepted in view of the mandate of Sect f Section 78(2) of the Punjab Excise ional Excise Act. The learned Revisional Court had made made a detailed discussion while pass nd in le passing the impugned order and in my opinion, com n, committed no error in passing the g no g the same. Accordingly, finding no plausible reason eason to allow the present petition, the on, the same is hereby dismissed. 01.04.2025 Jyoti-IV (MANISHA BATRA) (M JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned: Whether reportable : Yes/N es/No. es/No Yes/N Jyoti 2025.04.03 17:09 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document